Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

136
Letters
Wednesday, March 1, 2006 12:00 AM

Impeach Bush

The man was lost and then he was found and now he's more lost than ever -- and he's taking us into the darkness with him. It's time to remove him.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Wednesday, March 1, 2006 03:53 PM

Yes

I agree that it is extremely unlikely that an effort to impeach Bush would prove successful. However, what is there really to lose? I don't think that an unsuccessful impeachment effort would serve as any vindication for his misdoings. In fact, at least it will go in the history books that he was one of very few presidents crap enough to incite an impeachment attempt.

And maybe an impeachment effort would send a strong message - particularly to the rest of the world - that the U.S. is not wholly comprised of Bush-backers and that Bush's policies/attitudes do not represent America's policies/attitudes. Other countries forget that too frequently in the statist international arena.

Furthermore, it's about time the Democrats finished licking their wounds and became proactive again. This could be the galvanizing project.

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 03:17 PM

Finally someone has said what is on our minds!

Thank you Garrison Keillor! Now if we can get our Senators to wake up!

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 02:54 PM

Wounds of Bush -- "more painful and more poisonous than those of foreign wars"

Love your column, Mr. Keillor. Yes, in my dreams is this man (and the hyenas who trot alongside him) G-O-N-E.

But among the grim fruits of his reign are also Americans' diminished trust in the US Government, as well as in the voting process that gives rise to it. Not only has the Bush Administration governed badly, but it has deliberately fed a whole range of negatives (like fear, cynicism, partisan extremism) that make us, likely, ungovernable by anyone.

Impeachment is a fine remedy, but only if it's applied through a bipartisan awakening from our long national nightmare.

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 02:39 PM

War crimes

Thank you for saying "war crimes."

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 02:36 PM

Garrison for President

Why not?

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 02:17 PM

Impeach Bush - Then what?

Much as I agree with Keillor's premise, I am afraid that we would be going from the frying pan to the blast furnace. Isn't the Vice President the next in line? Nuff said.

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 01:55 PM

perhaps a signal of change to come?

Wow! When Garrison Keillor starts talking about torture and impeachment, you know things have really gotten out of hand. I am so pleased that he wrote this article (syndicated in newspapers all over the country). I'm sure he'll get hell for it, but maybe it is a sign of change to come. God willing!!!!!!!

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 01:50 PM

Impeachment? That's a knee slapper!

While so much has gone wrong with the American political system, it is laudable that Mr. Keillor still retains his sense of humor. Thank you, Garrison, for your hilarious and satirical modest proposal! The idea that the Republican-controlled congress would actually impeach Bush is hilarious! I laughed so hard that I almost cried. Of course, there is no denying the country would be better off with Bush & Co. serving out the remaining years of his presidency in a federal penitentiary- but to suggest that our congress might spontaneously grow a spine? Pure comedic genius! What a delightful joke! I know that some sticks in the mud probably didn’t "get" it- they thought you were being serious that George Bush could be held accountable for his war crimes, and violations of domestic and international law. Ha! Those of us in on your joke know that the laws of man do not apply to George W. Bush. I find myself giggling again just thinking about it! Mr. Keillor, you have proven once again that you can maintain your funny bone even in the face of the direst threat to American democracy since King George III. Well done, sir!

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 01:11 PM

No impeachment for these acts by this Congress

In order for the president to be removed from office he has to be charged by Congress with "high crimes and misdemeanors", then convicted in a trial held by the Senate and presided over by the Chief Justice. Lewinsky notwithstanding, "high crimes and misdemeanors" are things like literally criminal acts, gross abuses of the office's power in defiance of the other branches of government, and perhaps the most egregious instances of ineptitude.

The problem here is that the worst of what Bush has done is neither criminal nor in defiance of Congress or the judiciary. In fact, both the other branches are complicit in most of Bush's abuses. Congress gave him the Patriot Act, authorized the war in Iraq, confirmed his appointments and re-organizations, ratified his budgets, was heavily briefed on torture, and so on. The courts confirmed his right to create an offshore torture gulag archipelago and many elements of the domestic espionage program. I don't see how Congress can now turn around and say that these are crimes committed in defiance of the will of Congress, nor do I see how this chief justice nominated by Bush and confirmed by this Congress can preside over the ensuing trial.

The one possible exception is the domestic warrantless spying in contravention of FISA. Here there's a clear, knowing violation of a law. It looks like Congress didn't know about it, and clearly doesn't approve post hoc. No courts reviewed any of the instances. However, I don't see enough detail about these activities in the public record for a formal charge. Who was spied on? How were they affected? If Congress starts asking for this detail, and Bush stonewalls or lies, maybe there'll be grounds for an impeachment ("it's not the crime; it's the cover-up"), but we're a long ways from this.

Unfortunately I see only one way for Bush to be neutralized by constitutionally authorized means. We the people have to clean house in Congress, and loudly and clearly demand that Congress re-assert its powers over law, funding, and the activities of the executive. The current Congressional leadership is just as guilty as Bush in this mess, so don't expect them to clean it up.

Red state voters, the ball is in your court this year.

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 01:10 PM

Does no one here believe that the country can survive 3 more years?

There are a lot of people here getting pretty hysterical. Take a deep breath and count to 10, please. This country has survived quite a few bad presidents who made quite a few bad mistakes (including on certain beloved Democrat who brought this country to the verge of nuclear holocaust, closer than any president before or since).

Islamic terrorism has been and will continue to be a threat to our country, regardless of what GWB does. He could surrender us today, kiss Mecca (unless that is a sin; you never know) and there would still be well funded Muslim lunatics who try to kill innocent Americans. It won't all suddenly go away in January 2009.

And since when is the US president not more religious than average? It is necessary to win the presidency. Republicans have to pander to the Southern Baptists and Catholics. Democrats have to pander to African Americans and Hispanics, who are overwhelmingly religious as well. American women will still be free to abort on demand (and hopefully they will, because, apparently, it keeps the crime rate down, and who doesn't support that?)

This country will survive whatever buffoon is in the Oval Office. The average American should worry more about their own health, losing weight, saving money and working their way up the ladder. The opportunity still exists.

Most Active Letters Threads

359

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
323

Tough-guy John Bolton, hiding under his bed

As usual, right-wing pseudo-warriors are drowning in extreme cowardice.
186

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
154

Phil Carter's resignation from key detainee policy post

Many of the "War on Terror" policies he spent years condemning were ones expressly embraced by Obama.
99

Palin, Prejean: Beastly treatment for beauties

The governor turned author must fight what the pageant queen learned: Politics and hotness make strange bedfellows

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon